If you find yourself in a situation where you believe you may be eligible to participate in an ongoing class action lawsuit or if you seek to determine whether others have experienced circumstances similar to yours, the Dilendorf Law Firm is here to assist you.
Our dedicated team of class action lawsuits attorneys offers guidance and comprehensive assistance to individuals like you.
Class Actions in the Cryptocurrency Arena: Confronting Crypto Fraud with Dilendorf Law Firm
The cryptocurrency landscape, while offering immense opportunities, also presents risks, with numerous individuals falling victim to deceitful practices. Many have lost everything due to fraudulent schemes or scams.
In the face of such losses, collective action stands as one of the most potent ways to seek redress.
By banding together, victims can pool resources, confront powerful entities, and enhance the chances of recovering their investments.
Defining Cryptocurrency Class Action
A cryptocurrency class action is a legal proceeding initiated by a group of individuals, known as class members, who have experienced similar financial losses or harm related to cryptocurrencies.
These individuals join forces to collectively pursue legal action against a common defendant, which could be a cryptocurrency project, exchange, company, or entity responsible for the alleged wrongdoing.
Key Distinctions from Other Class Actions
While cryptocurrency class actions share core characteristics with other class action lawsuits, they also exhibit unique distinctions:
Complexity of the Crypto Space: Cryptocurrency class actions often involve intricate issues specific to the crypto industry, such as securities fraud, market manipulation, security breaches, and misrepresentation.
Evolving Regulatory Landscape: The cryptocurrency sector operates in a rapidly changing regulatory environment. Class actions in this space may intersect with evolving regulations, making them particularly dynamic.
Digital Evidence: Cryptocurrency-related disputes frequently hinge on digital evidence, including blockchain transactions, smart contracts, and electronic communication. This necessitates experience in handling digital evidence during litigation.
Market Volatility: Cryptocurrency prices are known for their volatility. Class actions in this context may be influenced by market fluctuations, adding an additional layer of complexity.
Alternative Remedies: Cryptocurrency class actions may seek unique remedies, including the recovery of lost digital assets, regulatory enforcement, or changes in project governance and transparency.
Every moment counts. If you, or someone you’re close to, has been impacted by crypto fraud, connect with our team without delay. Together, we’ll spearhead the charge against deception and work relentlessly toward setting things right.
Data Breach and Privacy Violations
In a world increasingly defined by digital footprints, the shadows of crypto fraud often intermingle with data breaches and privacy violations.
As many explore the realms of cryptocurrency, personal data becomes vulnerable, leading to unprecedented breaches that compromise customer’s privacy and financial security.
Why Collective Response is the Answer
With breaches affecting not just individuals but entire communities, collective action is the natural response.
Class actions unify those affected, giving weight to their claims and ensuring that large corporations or entities responsible are held to account.
This collective front not only seeks justice for individual victims but also sets a precedent, ensuring that data protection gets the attention it critically demands.
Dilendorf Law Firm: Your Shield in the Digital Battlefield
Building on our commitment to victims of crypto fraud, Dilendorf Law Firm is equally poised to confront challenges in the data privacy sector:
In-depth Knowledge: Our understanding of digital landscapes, be it crypto or data privacy, equips us to address the nuanced legal aspects of privacy violations.
Commitment: We recognize that a breach of privacy isn’t just about data—it’s about the violation of trust, security, and personal space. Our team is devoted to ensuring that those responsible are brought to justice.
Collaborative Strategy: In class actions, there’s strength in numbers. We bring affected individuals together, weaving their individual experiences into a compelling collective narrative that champions the right to privacy and digital security.
If your privacy has been compromised, or if you’ve been a victim of a data breach, especially in connection to crypto engagements, it’s time to reclaim control. Reach out to us.
Together, let’s fortify your digital rights and ensure that privacy breaches are met with the full force of the law.
Securities Fraud: An Overview
Following the vulnerabilities observed in the cryptocurrency sphere, it’s evident that deception doesn’t limit itself to the digital domain.
Securities fraud emerges as one of the most prevalent forms of deception, where misinformation or concealment can lead to significant financial losses for unwary investors.
What is a securities class action?
A securities class action is a lawsuit filed on behalf of a group of investors who have purchased or sold a company’s securities (like stocks or bonds) within a specific period and suffered financial loss due to violations of securities laws.
The violations typically involve misrepresentations or omissions of material facts or outright fraudulent activity by the company, its executives, or other associated entities.
The primary objective of a securities class action is to recover damages for investors caused by these misrepresentations or frauds.
Since individual investors’ losses might be too small to justify the cost of individual litigation, they band together in a class action to collectively sue the offending company or individuals.
This approach not only streamlines the litigation process but also levels the playing field against large corporations or entities.
Securities class actions can be based on various grounds, such as:
Misrepresentations in Financial Reporting: This occurs when a company provides false or misleading information in its financial statements or other public disclosures, leading investors to buy or sell based on inaccurate data.
Insider Trading: This is when individuals with non-public, material information about the company’s performance or prospects trade its securities to gain an unfair advantage.
Mergers and Acquisitions: Investors might claim they were provided with misleading information or not given all pertinent details about a merger or acquisition.
Breach of Fiduciary Duty: Here, corporate officers or board members are accused of not acting in the best interests of the shareholders.
If you’ve faced financial losses due to deceptive practices in securities, you’re not alone. Connect with Dilendorf Law Firm.
Together, we’ll ensure that your rights as an investor are protected, and those at fault are held accountable in the face of collective resolve.
Consumer Protection: Class Actions Upholding Consumer Rights with Dilendorf Law Firm
In an age defined by rapid commercial evolution, consumers are frequently confronted with deceptive business practices, misleading advertising, and substandard products.
While individual complaints might seem like mere drops in the ocean, combined, they can become a tidal wave of collective action against corporations that fail to uphold their duties.
Strength in Unity
Class actions in consumer protection allow individuals, who’ve been wronged in similar ways, to unify their voices.
This consolidation not only amplifies their cause but also levels the playing field, especially when challenging large corporations with significant resources.
Examples of Situations That May Lead to Consumer Class Actions:
Defective Products: Consumers receiving products that are defective or not up to the promised standards.
False Advertising: Companies providing misleading or false information about their products or services.
Breach of Warranty: Failure of companies to honor warranties or guarantees.
Overcharging: Situations where consumers are charged more than the advertised price or hidden fees are imposed.
Privacy Violations: Unauthorized sharing or use of personal consumer data without consent.
Harmful Products: Products causing health issues or hazards due to undisclosed side effects or risks.
Unfair Contract Terms: Consumers being bound by unfavorable contract terms that they were unaware of or did not consent to.
If you believe you’ve been adversely affected as a consumer, especially in situations resembling the examples above, Dilendorf Law Firm is here to guide and support.
Please do not hesitate to reach out to us at (212) 457-9797 or via email email@example.com to schedule a consultation, discuss your legal needs, and explore how we can advocate for your rights and interests.
Equifax announced that its systems had been breached and the sensitive personal data of 148 million Americans had been compromised. The Equifax breach is unprecedented in scope and severity. There have been larger security breaches by other companies in the past, but the sensitivity of the personal information held by Equifax and the scale of the problem makes this breach unprecedented.
A Class Action Settlement has been proposed in litigation against Yahoo! Inc. (“Yahoo”) and Aabaco Small Business, LLC, relating to data breaches (malicious actors got into system and personal data was taken) occurring in 2013 through 2016, as well as to data security intrusions (malicious actors got into system but no data appears to have been taken) occurring from, at least, January to April 2012 (collectively the “Data Breaches”).
Spear Wildman stored sensitive client information on an unsecured database that could be accessed without using a password or other forms of authentication. Hackers allegedly stole sensitive information from this unprotected database, including employment information, Social Security numbers, payment account information and more.
A settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit against Salud Family Health that claimed the company failed to protect its customers’ personally identifiable information during a data breach in which an unauthorized third party gained access to the company’s systems.
Reiter Affiliated is accused of failing to implement reasonable security measures to protect the personal information of employees related to the data breach. The company is also accused of failing to promptly inform those affected by the data breach.
Marriott experienced a widely publicized cybersecurity breach that resulted in the exposure of nearly 400 million customers’ personally identifying information, making it one of the largest data breaches in United States history. As is customary with data breach events today, the company was hit with a wave of class action litigation in the immediate aftermath of the security incident. On May 3, 2022, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland granted certification to eight classes of putative plaintiffs, encompassing millions of class members spanning six states, who were purportedly impacted by the breach. Marriott appealed.
A class action settlement has been proposed in a case against Capital One Financial Corporation, Capital One, N.A., and Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. (“Capital One”), and against Amazon.com, Inc., and Amazon Web Services, Inc. (“Amazon”) (together “Defendants”), relating to a data breach that Capital One announced in July 2019 (the “Data Breach”).
A federal judge found global consulting firm McKinsey & Company’s aggressive marketing tactics helped drive opioid sales for drugmaker clients like Purdue Pharma and caused wide-ranging harm to local governments and private citizens in 19 states.
Recently, cryptocurrency buyers withdrew five separate proposed class actions against various cryptocurrency companies. The cases, which were filed against Quantstamp, Inc.; Status Research and Development GmbH; Civic Technologies, Inc.; KayDex Pte. Ltd.; and HDR Global Trading Ltd., alleged that the companies harmed their customers by issuing or offering for sale digital assets that had not been properly registered as securities.
After the rejection last summer of a proposed $27.5 million settlement of tokenholders’ class action securities fraud claims and an aborted takeover of the litigation by a different plaintiffs’ firm, blockchain company Block.one has reached a new $22 million deal with investors – and this one could turn out to provide a template for future crypto class action settlements.
U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres granted summary judgment to Ripple on claims by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it peddled unregistered securities through sales to retail investors on digital asset exchanges. Those investors, Torres reasoned, did not know that Ripple was on the other side of the trades, so they could not have expected that Ripple would use their money to boost the value of the tokens.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced settled charges against James Michael Wines (“Wines”), arising out of his role in a crypto asset securities offering that raised more than $1.5 million from over 30 investors in May 2021. According to the SEC’s order, Wines participated in the drafting, review, and approval of an April 2021 press release that promoted the offering and the underlying purchase agreements for the offering.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced settled charges against Linus Financial, Inc. for failing to register the offers and sales of its retail crypto lending product, the Linus Interest Accounts. The SEC determined not to impose civil penalties against Linus Financial because of the Nashville-based company’s cooperation and prompt remedial actions.
Gemini, a New York-based crypto asset exchange and lending platform, offered and sold Gemini interest accounts to investors via Gemini Earn, through which investors lent crypto assets in exchange for interest payments. On or about November 16, 2022, Gemini halted Gemini Earn and refused to honor any further investor redemptions. The Action asserts claims under the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and under state law on behalf of a proposed class of persons who invested in the Gemini Earn program from February 2, 2021, through the December 27, 2022. The Action seeks rescission and damages.
A class action lawsuit has been launched against FTX’s former chief executive Sam Bankman-Fried over the crypto exchange’s collapse which also names as defendants a host of its celebrity backers including Larry David, Naomi Osaka, Gisele Bündchen and Shaquille O’Neal.
In the largest settlement of a private antitrust action in the 130-year history of the Sherman Act, on March 15, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit unanimously upheld the district court’s order giving final approval of a $5.6 billion settlement on behalf of U.S. merchants in the In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation. The case alleges that Visa, Mastercard, and their member banks violated antitrust laws and charged merchants who accept credit and debit cards supracompetitive fees on card transactions.
The Advance Auto Parts class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of Advance Auto Parts, Inc. securities between November 16, 2022 and May 30, 2023, inclusive. Captioned Suarez v. Advance Auto Parts, Inc., No. 23-cv-00563, the Advance Auto Parts class action lawsuit charges Advance Auto Parts and certain of its top executive officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
A shareholder filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. securities between August 15, 2022 and September 27, 2023. Brainstorm Cell is a biotechnology company that develops and commercializes autologous cellular therapies for the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases.
The PureCycle class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of PureCycle Technologies, Inc. securities between August 8, 2023 and September 13, 2023, inclusive. Captioned Southgate v. PureCycle Technologies, Inc., No. 23-cv-08605, the PureCycle class action lawsuit charges PureCycle and certain of its top executive officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Lumen Technologies class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of Lumen Technologies, Inc. securities between March 11, 2019 and July 14, 2023, inclusive. Captioned McLemore v. Lumen Technologies, Inc. f/k/a CenturyLink, Inc., No. 23-cv-01290 (W.D. La.), the Lumen Technologies class action lawsuit charges Lumen Technologies and certain of its top current and former executive officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP has filed a class action lawsuit, captioned Kinnally v. GigaCloud Technology Inc. on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired GigaCloud Technology Inc. : (a) Class A ordinary shares pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company’s August 2022 initial public offering; and/or (b) securities between August 18, 2022 and September 27, 2023, inclusive. Plaintiff pursues claims under Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Farfetch class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of Farfetch Limited securities between March 9, 2023 and August 17, 2023, both dates inclusive. Captioned Ragan v. Farfetch Limited, No. 23-cv-02857, the Farfetch class action lawsuit charges Farfetch and certain of its top current executive officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The FMC class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of FMC Corporation common stock between November 2, 2022 and October 20, 2023. Captioned Heeg v. FMC Corporation, No. 23-cv-04398, the FMC class action lawsuit charges FMC and certain of its top executive officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, captioned Feldman v. SCYNEXIS, Inc., et al., Case No. 23-cv-22082, on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired SCYNEXIS, Inc. securities between March 31, 2023 and September 22, 2023, inclusive. Plaintiff pursues claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The trial court’s certification order transforms the class action from a procedural device aimed at avoiding the inefficiencies of deciding the same claims repeatedly into a tool for altering the parties’ substantive rights.
Three Volkswagen-branded franchise dealers that sold turbocharged direct injection diesel engine vehicles equipped with so-called “defeat devices brought civil RICO claims against Robert Bosch GmbH and Robert Bosch LLC. The dealers alleged that Bosch and Volkswagen conspired to develop, implement, and promote defeat devices, thereby participating in a racketeering enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and that they also conspired to violate RICO.
A trial lawyer who secured a nearly $90 million verdict against Monsanto filed suit against H&R Block on Wednesday, alleging the tax preparation firm collaborated with Meta and Google to embed “spyware” on its website to make money from scraped tax return data.
On October 8, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit released its decision in In re BofI Holding, Inc. Securities Litigation (Bofl), a securities class action suit launched against bank holding company BofI Holding by investors. In the suit, the investors alleged that, between September 2013 and February 2016, BofI executives made misrepresentations to investors about the bank’s loan underwriting standards, internal controls and compliance infrastructure.